Evaluation of persistence, retention "rate" and prescription pattern of original infliximab and infliximab CT-P13 in biologic-naive patients with ulcerative colitis

Objective: To compare the persistence, retention rate and prescription pattern of original infliximab and infliximab CT-P13 in biologic-naive patients with ulcerative colitis. Method: This was an ambispective study of biologic-naive patients with ulcerative colitis who received not-simultaneous first-line treatment with Remicade (R) (infliximab) and Remsima (R) (infliximab CT-P13) over a 10-year study period (2012-2021). Data on their age, weight, persistence, retention rate and on whether they required intensification or deintensification throughout the study period was collected. The real patient/year cost of Remicade (R) and Remsima (R) was determined individually based on the amounts administered during the study period. Results: 27 biologic-naive patients were treated with Remicade (R) and 53 with Remsima (R). Neither patient group presented with differences in terms of weight and age. Persistence (median +/- interquartile range) with Remicade (R) was 42.49 +/- 57.48 months, as compared to 2750 +/- 58.50 months for Remsima (R), without significant differences (p = 0.455). The retention rate at 6, 12, and 24 months was 81%, 63%, and 33%, respectively, for the Remicade (R) group and 71%, 47%, and 37%, respectively, for the Remsima (R) group. Nine subjects in the Remicade (R) group vs 11 patients in the Remsima (R) group were intensified. Regarding deintensification, five patients heated with Remicade (R) were deintensified, as compared with 7 patients on Remsima (R). Savings obtained with the use of Remsima (R) amounted to 203,649 (sic), which would allow treating an additional 118 patients with biosimilar infliximab for one year. Conclusions: There are no significant differences in persistence, retention, and number of intensifications or deintensifications between biologic-naive patients treated with Remicade (R) and those treated with Remsima (R), the latter being an effective, safe and economical alternative for the treatment of ulcerative colitis.